Perhaps they are not as intelligent as you think they are.

I believe that highly intelligent people can do incredibly stupid things -- I've seen it first hand.

The correlating factor for those two acquaintances is that they are both devout Christians. I find that to be beyond ironic but also makes sense, as that devotion parallels the appeal to authority and many churches are run by leaders who believe in Supply Side Jesus.

I don't mean this to be inflammatory as it's only an observation, but organized religion is not compatible with modern society,

You’re not the first to make such observations. To quote Barry Goldwater (Republican party nominee for US President in 1964):

> Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.

Was he describing America or Iran? Hard to figure out as we seemed to be in War due to similar people in control of another (not)important country :)

It was about America. I think the only overlap between "conservative" Republicans and religious fundamentalists is the "social conservatism", e.g., "family values", "law and order", etc. The quotes are because there's debate about what those terms really mean.

The key difference is that religious fundamentalists pledge their allegiance to the Church, not the country; not "God" either (although they might claim it to be so). They are tribal to their core and anybody outside their church is an "other" and is not worthy of being considered a fellow citizen.

> correlating factor

There's a free ebook from 2006 that tries to dive into it as a personality spectrum:

https://theauthoritarians.org/

It has some interesting assertions/observations about issues like double-standards and fear as a motive.

I agree with your last organized religion comment somewhat, but the jump to devout Christians based off some anecdotes comes off as a bit prejudiced. The "not trying to be inflammatory" is a decent pre-emptive hedge attempt, but still falls flat when reading. This is a pattern I see here sometimes, which is criticism of religion drifting into assumptions about specific groups, and it tends to weaken an argument that was otherwise reasonable. And I'm saying this as someone who is extremely critical of Christianity.

The truth is that people are perfectly capable of making bad decisions regardless of their beliefs. Appealing to authority is not unique to religion. You see this same thing in corporate environments, academic circles, political groups, etc... It's probably more useful to focus on that broader dynamic than tie it to a specific group.

I take no pleasure in my assessment at all, and I would love to be proven wrong.

Let me give you one of countless examples of why I said what I did: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/26/hegseth-pray...

There plenty of other criticisms of groups and systems and people in general. But the "God Says So" crowd is very real and has been with us the whole time.

I consider myself to be deeply spiritual and understand the appeal and would even join in the faith if I thought it was real. But I don't. I wish I didn't have to pay any attention to it or care about it or think about it at all. But I do.

The reason I care, and I speak up about it, is that there are factions in power that embody exactly what my "prejudice" criticizes. This is everyone's business because they are making their faith everyone's business.

Edit: I believe this dialog is germane to HN because the subject is literally about the hacking of democracy itself.

Ironically Jesus always had beef with the religious conservatives of His time: the Pharisees.